It seems that 2009 Bordeaux is the only vintage to buy, no?

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:03 am

...Especially if you are between the ages of 40-55?

I haven't had a single bottle yet, but....

The vintage is rated 97-100 by Wine Spectator.

It seems to have a similar rating from HWSRN.

It seems like a "left bank vintage."

The prices, at least in the U.S., seem to be about 60% of the 2010 releases. The prices are expensive but not crazy expensive like the 2010 vintage.

It seems that, with 2010, there is a(nother) paradigm shift upwards in pricing of Bordeaux classified wines.

HWSRN seems to find them ageworthy, with many predictions of 30-40 years of aging potential. If you are 50ish, these will be good wines to drink in your seventies.

Here are just a few examples of 2009 and 2010 pricing from the website of PJs Wine Warehouse in Manhattan, which consistently has some of the best futures pricing in the U.S.:

Branaire Ducru
2009: $63.97
2010: $88.97

d'Issan
2009: $61.97
2010: $90.97

Giscours
2009: $57.97
2010: $81.97

Lynch Bages
2009: $133.97
2010: $174.97

Pontet Canet
2009:
2010: $184.97

And on and on...

You get the idea....

Sounds like the 2009 Bordeaux vintage will be the last "great" vintage we will be able to come close to affording, and the wines will age into our retirements!

I'm planning on loading up on 2009 Bordeaux!

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:16 am

And according to what I've read, Jim, 2010 will take longer than 2009 to come around. 2010 may bests be left to those under 40, rich under 40s that is.
There are a few chateaux that lowered their 2010 price from their 2009. If I recall correctly, Cos d'Estournel and Ducru Beaucaillou are amongst them. Not too many, I realize, but a few.
How does the pricing of the 09s compare to the release prices of the 05s?

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:22 am

A little more expensive, I think, but not by a lot.
I note Sociando 2010 is going for $40 at PJs.

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:33 am

Jim you should just backfill on 1996 Left Bank. At our age you are better served by top past vintages than paying dizzy record prices for infant wines from an ever riper planet.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:54 am

While many critics are obviously big on 09, there have been a few cautionary voices. According to John Gilman, for example, it is inconsistant and buyers need to be selective. He also warns it might not be the vintage for those who prefer their Bdx "old school":

"But 2009 is emphatically not a classic vintage, and it is not a consistent vintage, so one really has to be careful with selection. It is not classic because the alcohol levels are notably higher than is customary in a top vintage- pretty much across the board a full degree higher than in 2005 (which was by no means a low alchol vintage)- and so one has to pick and choose amongst those estates who have managed the higher alcohol levels well and those that have produced hot wines. IME, it is a very rare wine that shows its higher alcohol level as heat on the backend that ages well over the long haul, and due to the very high tannin content of the 2009s, aging over the long haul is going to be a prerequisite. And there are plenty of 2009s that show heat and are candidates to crash and burn, rather than blossom with bottle age."

"The vintage conditions also were difficult enough to produce a lot of wines with overt signs of overripeness- which not only produces undesirable aromatic and flavor combinations such as prunes, kirsch and boysenberry syrup, but also takes away from any expression of terroir and really muddies focus and precision on the palate. The vintage’s very high natural tannin content has also been augmented at many estates with an overly generous blast of new wood- leaching wood tannins into already tannic wines and really calling into question their overall balances, so there are plenty of wines that will never blossom and simply whither in the bottle."

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:29 am

Bacchus wrote:While many critics are obviously big on 09, there have been a few cautionary voices. According to John Gilman, for example, it is inconsistant and buyers need to be selective. He also warns it might not be the vintage for those who prefer their Bdx "old school":

"But 2009 is emphatically not a classic vintage, and it is not a consistent vintage, so one really has to be careful with selection. It is not classic because the alcohol levels are notably higher than is customary in a top vintage- pretty much across the board a full degree higher than in 2005 (which was by no means a low alchol vintage)- and so one has to pick and choose amongst those estates who have managed the higher alcohol levels well and those that have produced hot wines. IME, it is a very rare wine that shows its higher alcohol level as heat on the backend that ages well over the long haul, and due to the very high tannin content of the 2009s, aging over the long haul is going to be a prerequisite. And there are plenty of 2009s that show heat and are candidates to crash and burn, rather than blossom with bottle age."

"The vintage conditions also were difficult enough to produce a lot of wines with overt signs of overripeness- which not only produces undesirable aromatic and flavor combinations such as prunes, kirsch and boysenberry syrup, but also takes away from any expression of terroir and really muddies focus and precision on the palate. The vintage’s very high natural tannin content has also been augmented at many estates with an overly generous blast of new wood- leaching wood tannins into already tannic wines and really calling into question their overall balances, so there are plenty of wines that will never blossom and simply whither in the bottle."

This does not strike me as sounding like a JimHow vintage. High tannins, very ripe fruit, high alcohol. a claimed need for long cellaring and what about the acids?

Go with the 96's.

Houndsong · Post by **Houndsong** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:30 am

God, 2009 sounds awful. No wonder it's so cheap.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:23 am

Proposition: 2009 sounds like 2000, the greatest vintage of all time, no?

Houndsong · Post by **Houndsong** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:08 am

Gilman's take is so at odds with the basic trade view of 2009, at least in the US. K&L's report, tracking and cribbing from Bill Blatch, was that it was the perfect vintage.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:31 am

Gilman isn't exactly alone in his opinion, Hound. Chris Kissack makes similar remarks on his site:

"So is it the Vintage of the century it was caimed to be by some almost as soon as the grapes were harvested? Well, the answer to that question is complicated. Yes, there are some stunning wines in this vintage, majestic efforts with balance and power paradoxically combined, and these wines, estates and winemakers deserve due respect. There are also many good wines one or two rungs down the ladder, wines that have succeeded in maintaining freshness and balance along with true character. But, as I have already expounded in my first report, there is more to a great vintage than a few great wines. The 2009 vintage is also a story of inconsistency, with a number of very weird, extracted and most of all overtly alcoholic wines out there, There is not the broad success that was found in 2005. Be prepared for a variety of opinions on this from the critics though; some sources are happy simply to cheer and banner-wave, especially when they maintain close relationships with the proprietors, but even where opinion is more considered there are inconsistencies. I have already seen one tweet awarding high praise to a wine I marked down, unimpressed by its sweet fruit and thick-chewy tannins, but most of all I was put off by the obvious seam of alcohol within the wine. Perhaps some palates are just less sensitive to this component of wine? There are some wines that seem particularly set up to divide opinion - watch out for opinions on Cos d'Estournel, this wine being the front-runner in that race."

That said, both Gilman and Kissack recognize that this vintage of the century has produced many great wines. I guess we just need to exercise a bit of caution.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:49 am

Yeah, well some reviewers dissented about 2000 as well, and 1982, and....
You can find someone who hedges their bets in any vintage. I don't put much stock in comments that say: There are gems to be found but caution is advised, blah, blah... I mean, you can say that about ANY vintage.
It seems like the raw materials, alcohol, etc , as well as the all important weather, all fell in place for a potentially great vintage, no?

pomilion · Post by **pomilion** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:59 am

I don't know anyone who takes Gilman seriously on Bordeaux. I'm sure he's got fans/subscribers, but none I've ever met or spoken to. He's an almost perfect negative weather-vane for me on bordeaux. Virtually all of the established, respected critics are somewhere between bullish and over-the-moon about 2009. And, as Jim points out, in most cases the 09s are meaningfully less expensive than the '10s.

AlexR · Post by **AlexR** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:35 am

I agree with Chris Kissack.

In both the 2009 and 2010 vintages, I tasted a LOT of top-heavy alcoholic wines on the right bank, including some famous names.

However, 2009 Médocs were beauties.
I'd say that mid-rank wines are a good bet for people in their 50s/60s.
As for the big guns, they are, unsurprisingly, 20-30 year wines.

Best regards,
Alex R.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 10:31 am

I dont' think anyone is suggesting that 09 is anything less than a smashing year, and all acknowledge that it has produced many, many great wines. I will certainly be buying 09s, more so than the 08s (although I just picked up 1/2 case of the 08 LeoPoyferre

). Most of the problem seems to be with wines that use a large proportion of Merlot -- hence AlexR's concerns over the right bank. It was a little bit too hot for Merlot, it seems, and those chateaux that didn't perform due diligence ended up with over-ripe fruit. The Cab seems to have done better, so 09 may be one of those years that favours the left bank over the right (the inverse of 08?)

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure what to think about the variety of critical voices out there, so many of them at odds with each other. I guess the critics all have their own preferred styles (Gilman likes traditional wines, Parker likes parkerized wines

), and these variables affect their respective assessments of the wines. I prefer to think they're not out and out charlatans, even though their views will no doubt be affected by a whole range of things beyond their personal tastes: friendships, business considerations, romantic notions about wine, the mood they were in when tasting, their egos, the alignment of the planets, etc. But we're all influenced by these sorts of things. I guess we just hope the pros are experienced and professional enough to minimize these influences in their assessments (okay I'm dreaming). For a synopses of the leading critics' views of the 09 vintage:
http://www.farrvintners.com/blog.php?blog=56

And for a really upbeat report, defending the chateaux ability to deal with over-ripe grapes:
http://www.decanter.com/news/wine-news/ ... ste-divide

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:51 am

Oh even Parker cites some inconsistencies on the right bank. Myself, I'm a left bank man. For my own taste, I measure the greatness of a vintage based on how it performs in the Medoc.

Houndsong · Post by **Houndsong** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:32 pm

The sky this morning is laced with salmon and vermillion colored clouds. The 02 Ducru Beaucaillou is at attention.

If the 08 Fonroque that arrived yesterday resembles at all in structure-substance the 08 Langoa, I'd say 08 deserves further investigation.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:58 pm

I'm more of a left bank person too. Indeed, I have so little right bank it's embarrassing. Maybe, if that 08 Fonrdoque turns out to be really good . . . The problem with the right bank is that there are just so many more left bank wines I want to get before, perhaps, getting a little right. Speaking of affordable left bankers, has anyone tasted the 05 La Bessane. A bit of it has just showed up in town.

Jeff Leve · Post by **Jeff Leve** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:34 pm

It's been a while. I hope it's OK to drop in and chat a bit. I could not find my old login, so I am a newbie once again.

I love 2009 Bordeaux. At their best, they are rich, opulent, pure, sensuous Bordeaux wines. Think 82, 89 or 90, but with better. The wines are alcoholic, but there is no sensation of heat in most of the wines. Pauillac, St. Julien, St. Estephe and Pessac Leognan are the best appellations in the Left Bank. Pomerol is the star of the vintage. St. Emilion is mixed.

They are expensive, but the best wines should deliver pleasure young and age well.

If you want to read my tasting notes on over 200 different 2009 wines... http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/win ... ying-tips/

Price aside, as many people asked about 2010 in the Left Bank, the difference is more about style than quality. 2010 is a more tannic, masculine, structured vintage. The wines have more pop and freshness, but they lack the sultry textures found in 2009. Margaux is better in 2010. 2009 is better for St. Estephe. Pauillac, St, Julien and Pessac Leognan are a draw. Although Pauillac and St. Julien might lean a bit better in the 2010 direction. Pomerol is miles ahead in 2009 and the reverse is true for St. Emilion, with most estates making better wine in 2010, than they did in 2009.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:53 pm

Welcome back, pomerollover.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:54 pm

Hey Jeff good to hear from you!
Thanks for the enablement.
I'm going to read your notes.

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 12:04 am

Jim - '09s are cheap compared to '10s but expensive compared to everything that went before. It's all relative, I guess, but I found it hard to get enthusiastic about '09s based on price. The character of the vintage as I read the reports appealed to me. I think Jeff Leve (welcome back, Jeff!) has summed it up well: the best wines are "rich, opulent, pure, sensuous." That's right up my alley, and I bought a bunch of under-$50 wines that got good scores with descriptions in line with that, plus a few more pricey ones, but I'm not sure that those qualities are the ones you tend to go nuts for.

Claudius2 · Post by **Claudius2** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 1:34 am

Guys
To answer the question abut prices, go to www.bordoverview.com as it lists the European en primeur prices.
The 2005 prices to 2010 increased a lot, Lafite for example icnreasing from E490 to E1350.
While a rather extreme example, the overall prices doubled from 05 to 10 in an area of financial crises and debt defaults.

Prices overall increased from 09 to 10 by about 15%, Lafite up a ludicrous 15%.
While a few did fall in price, they bucked the trend.
The Singapore dollar increased over the time and thus at least here most prices were up by around 8-10% thus I did not notice it as much as others.

In relation to 09 being the only vintage worth buying, I wonder if there is much older stock in your markets??
For example, I can buy older stock here any day of the week direct from the negociants or chateau for en primeur prices (and sometimes lower) for 00's vintages and for higher but still reasonable prices for earlier vintages.

My buying strategy has always to buy some from all but the worst vintages.
So in the last 11 years, I bought some from every vintage except 07.
In the 90's I bought 1990, no 91 or 92, little 93 and 94, lots of 95 and 96, and some right bank 98s.

So of the best wines I have ever had are from less than supposedly great vintages.
They were not full bodied, but had heaps of flavour intensity without masses of tannins, glycerols, alcohol or dry matter.
Just wines that were delicious to drink without stripping the enamel off your teeth!

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 1:39 am

I agree with you Claudius.
Bordeaux, especially left bank Bordeaux, is just fucking great, period... even in vintages less than "the greatest ever."
I wonder if the difference in prices in the U.S, from 2009 to 2010 has to do with fluctuations in the dollar?

Claudius2 · Post by **Claudius2** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:27 am

Sorry
Lafite up 50% not 15%!!!
E900 to E1350.
Get real.

Jim,
I watch currencies all the time as I receive income in three of them ($A, $S and USD) and I also have a long memory when it comes to money!
The local (Singapore) currency is now quite strong and the Aussie went from US 47.75c to over $US 1.10 between the late 90s and this year.

In Aust we did not notice the price increases as much due to a rising local currency, but I imagine the devaluation of the greenback hurt a lot.
Even before the GFC, the greenback was falling.
It was worth about E1.3 in 2000, now it is the other way round.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:31 am

Yes this whole Decline of America thing is starting to interfere with my Bordeaux purchases and is, among many other reasons, really starting to piss me off....

JonoB · Post by **JonoB** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 10:30 am

I also believe from what I tasted that 09 is mixed and top heavy, and I prefer 2010... I don't like the prices for either vintage. Such is life...

Overall, wine market prices are dropping... There may be hope for the future!!

If the speculators are pulling out and prices keep going up first tranche, the négoc will get stung and we will see lower prices... (as it will make EP until prices drop irrelevant; WHY? Wait until the market dictates the price!) as long as speculators are making money on we want to drink, then we will never see value in Bordeaux again... As long as we see them pull out of the bubble (plenty still go on about China, but I just don't see it), we will see value again, I will be filling my boots!

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:34 am

I'm planning on buying 6-12 bottles each of the following 2009s:

Domaine de Chevalier
Giscours
d'Issan
Cantemerle
Calon Segur
Cantenac Brown
Branaire Ducru
Gruaud Larose
Clos des Lunelles
Lanessan
Cap de Faugeres
Joanin Becot
Sociando Mallet
Talbot
Chasse Spleen
Phelan Segur
La Lagune
de Fieuzal
Haut Bergey
Larrivet Haut Brion
d'Aiguilhe
d'Armaillac
Grand Mayne
Lagrange
Rouget
Vrai Canon Bouche

You're all invited to my 75th birthday!!

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:21 am

Here's my list of '09s. I started with just value plays but got sucked into buying some pricier favorites like Angelus, Pichon Lalande, etc. All this after swearing I was done buying Bordeaux futures. Jim, you and I will share some of these in the nursing home.

Angélus
Barde-Haut
Beausejour Duffau Lagarrosse
Branon
Cantemerle
Clinet
Clos Fourtet
Domaine de Chevalier
Haut-Bailly
Haut-Bergey
Lalande-Borie
Lanessan
Pichon Lalande
Pontet-Canet
Poujeaux
Talbot

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:23 am

Well done, David. Very well done....

Michael-P · Post by **Michael-P** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:40 am

For me, I bought a lot of enprem 09s:

22 cases, from just 10 Ch., split 12 Left and 10 Right.

No Firsts.

And still debating if I should by any 10 Lynch. BD?

Michael-P

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:41 am

Nice wines, gentlemen. I haven't got all of my selections sorted out yet for 09, but so far the short list contains:

d'Issan
Rauzan Segla
Giscours?
Malescot St-Exupery
Duhart Milon
d'Armailhac
Grand Puy Lacoste
Pontet Canet
Gruaud Larose?
Leoville Barton?
Leoville Poyferre?
Saint Pierre?
Dom. du Chevalier
Smith Haut Lafitte

Can't wait for the birthday party, Jim.

Claudius2 · Post by **Claudius2** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:40 am

Well, the wines I bought from 2009 (cases) were as follows:

Left Bank
Domaine Chevalier (rouge)
D'armhaillac
Giscours
Calon Segur
La Lagune
St Pierre
Branaire Ducru
Prieure Lichine
Malescot St Exurpery

Right Bank
Larcis Ducasse
Beausejour Becot
La Confession
La Dominique
L'arossee
Clos Oratroire
Fonroque

And I think that's enough for one year.

Michael-P · Post by **Michael-P** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 12:03 pm

You are all making me think I need to buy more 09s but my cellar is too big already!
(Yes, I know, you have an idea on how to help me with that problem).

Michael-P

Houndsong · Post by **Houndsong** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:01 pm

I strategically defaulted on 09. What little buying I've done lately includes opportunistic grabs of some 05s and tried and true 03s. Besides, the more I read about the 09s the less they appeal to me. I'll buy some when they hit and go from there.

Anyway I'm one of those dilettante-types and the scales have come off to a certain extent.

JonB · Post by **JonB** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:39 pm

My purchases were:

Duhart Milon
La Croix St Georges (hard to resist this at $22)
Leoville Poyferre
Montrose
Pavie Macquin
Pontet Canet

I may buy more after tasting, but have scaled back from the last vintage of century purchasing.

pomilion · Post by **pomilion** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 6:49 pm

My '09 purchases so far (about 15 cases):

Pontet Canet
Duhart Milon
Leoville Poyferre
Malescot
Clinet
Tertre Roteboeuf
Pavie Macquin
Beausejour Duffau

I'm very excited about the vintage and will probably pick up quite a few cases of inexpensive and mid-priced 09s -- trying to decide when, as I'll be tasting many of them at the UGC in January but Parker will unfortunately be re-scoring them at the end of December so I may need to pick up a few in advance of the anti-consumer advocate striking again... Very unfortunate timing (UGC vs. Parker re-rating vintage).

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 6:53 pm

My list of 2009s:

...

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 7:02 pm

I'll bring some along, Stefan, to the Great Tasting Room in the Sky....

pomilion · Post by **pomilion** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 7:37 pm

I'm in a similar boat age-wise, Jim. One of the appealing (compelling if you're 50 or older) attributes of the vintage is that many of the wines should be drinking beautifully in 12-18 years. I've had a number of stunning '90s over the past 6 to 8 years. Personally (knock on wood!) I plan on being alive and drinking nice wines in my mid-sixties to at least mid-eighties...

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:39 pm

Indeed pomilion... Thirty years following 2009 is already pushing it towards the end of my projected lifespan, so in a few years it is going to be a moot issue for me regardless of price. But if "great" vintages in the future are priced like 2010, which seems to be 20-50% more than '09, then 2009 in all likelihood will be the last great vintage that I'll stock up on. Thus, my strategy of loading up on 2009s. I'll pay $62 per bottle for a half dozen d'Issans, but won't pay $91 for even one bottle.